On 10/02/16 13:31, Claudiu Zissulescu wrote:
Please find attached the amended patch for FPU instructions.
Ok to apply?
+(define_insn "*cmpdf_fpu"
I'm wondering - could you compare with +zero using a literal (adding an
alternative)?
(No need to hold up the main patch, but you can consider it for a
follow-up patch)
(define_insn "*cmpsf_fpu_uneq"
+ [(set (reg:CC_FPU_UNEQ CC_REG)
+ (compare:CC_FPU_UNEQ
+ (match_operand:DF 0 "even_register_operand" "r")
Typo: probably should be *cmpdf_fpu_uneq
+ case CC_FPUmode:
+ return !((code == LTGT) || (code == UNEQ));
`
strictly speaking, this shouldn't accept unsigned comparisons,
although I can't think of a scenario where these would be presented
in this mode,
and the failure mode would just be an abort in get_arc_condition_code.
Otherwise, this is OK.
